Given that the use of sarin etc was a basic part of Soviet, and Iraqi, doctrine and totally to be expected, wonder if it could be simulated? Unlike multi-megaton nuclear warheads, chemical warfare would be within the scale of WinSPMBT, or even WinWW.

Perhaps on first use some percent of troops not in closed up vehicles would be killed out to some distance from impact. Given that Win SPMBT simulates smoke from burning vehicle being blown down wind, it seems the gas cloud could be manipulated similarly. Given that chemical, and radioactive, recon for contaminated ground was a major mission of recon units, it would be very realistic to model that - if the code would allow it.

Different delivery vehicles would impact different numbers of hexes, artillery rounds vs SCUDs and FROGs.

Boring down a bit, different quality units would be affected differently.

Seems possible that initial casualties would be a straightforward adjustment of the results of an artillery strike. The downwind cloud could maybe be a use of the code for downwind smoke + lethality. Creation of contaminated areas, I have no idea; but would be a huge reality bonus.

Given that this was a thing all sides trained for and all sides expected, this would be a great addon.

Exactly because "everyone" trained for it the casualties in the front lines would be minimal (probably a LOT LESS than a standard artillery strike!) and adding a whole new mechanic, weapon class, etc probably wouldn't be worth the development time and effort for a weapon that few countries - nevermind players - would ever use!

In reality, with the possible exception of the WWI-like trench warfare of some of the Iraq-Iran war, it has only ever been used on untrained and unequipped civilians...

Edit the relevant OObs and deduct 2 from all movement to allow for wearing Noddy suits, being closed down AFV etc, leaving at least 1 MP for lower (guns, mortars) if you desire.

NBC adds time and effort (try digging a trench in noddy suits in summer - I have!) but it does not really have any "killer" effects except on the unprotected - third world armies, civilians etc. And even in that case - the user army has to suit up to enter the "slimed" areas.

Exactly because "everyone" trained for it the casualties in the front lines would be minimal (probably a LOT LESS than a standard artillery strike!) and adding a whole new mechanic, weapon class, etc probably wouldn't be worth the development time and effort for a weapon that few countries - nevermind players - would ever use!

In reality, with the possible exception of the WWI-like trench warfare of some of the Iraq-Iran war, it has only ever been used on untrained and unequipped civilians...

Others have made some useful suggestions, however you really don't know about this stuff. First, there would be a serious degradation in performance and a certain percent of deaths from those who are slow and fumble. Second, exercises/tests have shown the stuff would be very hard to contain, resulting in wide spread contamination/death outside the initial strike area.

Just an idea. Adding gas would suppress the heck out of troops about to be attacked and could be delivered to create no go areas like mines would, without having to emplace them.

it does not really have any "killer" effects except on the unprotected - third world armies, civilians etc. And even in that case - the user army has to suit up to enter the "slimed" areas.

Based on at least one serious exercise with a non-toxic but similar substance the conclusion was that attempts to retrieve wounded in contaminated clothing/suits would result in the contamination of the entire medical evac chain. And ofc contamination in this case means death.

But I was just thinking of recon and artillery delivered area denial barrages - in WW2, not modern times. Perhaps the effects modified by nationality and level of training. And while I've never dug a trench in MOPP4 I was part of a battalion that bemused the local Germans as we marched a 10k Volksmarch in MOPP4 in August - NOT fun.

You answered your own question pretty much on why it’s not worth including.
Gas attack and then attack, if your evenlightly wounded your dead because no medieval hence you would not do it unless it was against someone with no defence against it.
Could conceivably be used to make no go areas so just place swamp terrain to show contaminated area. Slow movement and poor defensive rating. Do as a one off if you like but that’s what it would be.

Against fully equipped and adequately trained troops chemical warfare is more of a pain-in-the-*** then a killer. VS non equipped or poorly trained troops it's rather pointless to represent it in a game like WinSPMBT ... you use gas ... you win ... period.

__________________
Suhiir - Wargame Junkie

People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." - Albert Einstein